Ending death penalty would fuel crime

ON PROP. 34 Against: Ultimate sentence provides some deterrence

Stephen M. Wagstaffe and Marc Klaas

Updated
4:46 pm PDT, Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Should California preserve the death penalty for vicious murderers?

That's the real question for voters considering Proposition 34. It's not about saving money or preventing the execution of innocent people. Those are political statements by special interests who have consistently fought against capital punishment. Prop. 34 is their latest effort, complete with a catchy name and slick sales pitch.

We oppose Prop. 34 from the perspective of a father forced to bury his 12-year-old little girl after she was raped and murdered, and a district attorney who has taken an oath to defend and protect innocent citizens.

Should it pass, Prop. 34 would embolden violent criminals. Make no mistake; criminals will take advantage of leniency and act brazenly without fear of consequences.

A death sentence is given to fewer than 2 percent of convicted murderers. It is reserved for cases with a separate finding of special circumstances attributed to crimes so violent that juries unanimously decided capital punishment was warranted.

For example, serial killer Robert Rhoades kidnapped 8-year-old Michael Lyons as he was walking home from school. Rhoades tortured and raped the little boy for 10 hours, stabbing him 70 times, before slitting his throat and dumping his body in a river.

Prop. 34 lets these killers escape the death penalty and requires taxpayers to spend tens of millions of dollars to provide them with lifetime health care and housing benefits.

Supporters also claim eliminating capital punishment ensures "innocent" people won't be executed. They blur the significant difference between not guilty and innocent, which is dishonest. Gov. Jerry Brown has stated there are no innocent people on California's Death Row.

Prop. 34 proponents believe that life in prison without parole should be California's maximum punishment. Patricia Pendergrass has experience with how a life sentence can mean nothing. Behind the walls of Folsom Prison, while serving a life sentence for the murder of a teenage girl, Clarence Ray Allen planned and ordered the execution of Pendergrass' brother Bryon Schletewitz and two others. For that, he earned a death sentence.

The harshest insult Prop. 34 supporters make is that the death penalty is too expensive. Never mind that the initiative takes $100 million from California's general fund. Proponents' born-again fiscal conservatism is hypocritical because they are the ones who have for decades disrupted the system by filing endless legal appeals.

Other states afford criminals due process while enforcing the death penalty. We can, too. Join us and protect California by voting no on Prop 34.